Whether the lower court erred in its interpretation and application of the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED W \3) THAD WV SOTERA, XB v OO Wea DSA CQukRt © Use BISON IN WT OWES, WSL {Od BOB SRR SUCH f DTSeers WEARERS SHISLETIO os WOME? SEE PSD SS AT AEE OK SSWDERK on yomeRe SK Ws SRST RY ou, N>_O& NOW Ree Gow WEST CESUSTONAL_ DACAKE AG YS & DW OSsweacy SSSRT SERED ax SNBNG, Satay GIN K sas we SOU \ EMIT WOH, | VESSSEPST OB Qk xy SL LAKES OS, Sst SE WD TASHA, SENERTQESETIQIE, i) VS ADEEex LI KRK ASRS BW SOISSSTG, WES SKRERR EAI, BRR EK WO LSM DAT BS PRS eX CoS\cx P<, Sears RRR VSS DD NOV QOIGN Sa Uses | SLT VON? a) DO Dew: Courts SRR DA SRSTTNUNG, NSSSeoant XO BOs SMPRASON Mg AT WITH |, MTS of Yong CONFI AS NEE RDTNTION oR YRAES oh Sor ey Rh | Wise. BSTRERL WEE SOIT NRRSEN TE) NG ROM, SES ASSTREN SE BRR Age a Suey i = wee OS RRS ‘Ow | IS) DD WSS RAK Sor Se iN SS Ue SFO DLR SK RILG SNE bony SESE XN QUaN Vo lay PWD) ESSISTANT YSERANL PSBUE TRS NT “YES Vc, ASA NST PRR Oo RAS BAT QE? Dip Se ERS AND CoE Stow ATTORNEYS, SOTHATLS KR RASS, SSSRT To SR TREAT OF \ FRING Sex WEEN oF XN .